For Cities Seeking To Grow, Bigger Isn’t Always Better

[M II A II R II K]

For Cities Seeking To Grow, Bigger Isn’t Always Better


SEPTEMBER 2018

By Scott Beyer

Read More: http://www.governing.com/columns/urb...-beltline.html

As cities look to create vibrant, walkable downtowns, they frequently turn to linear infrastructure that is often fixed and bulky -- think light rail -- to spur development. It’s presumed that big and flashy projects will attract private investment. But Atlanta’s Beltline shows that simpler infrastructure can achieve the same results.

- Atlanta’s Beltline concept began in 1999, after a Georgia Tech student named Ryan Gravel wrote a paper proposing a 22-mile walking trail around the city that follows a former freight track. Under the formal plan, the trail will eventually run through 45 neighborhoods and calls for brownfield cleanups, park refurbishment, streetscape improvements and adding affordable housing. About half of the $4.8 billion budgeted will go to transit, namely a streetcar. In this sense, says Gravel, who now works as an advocate for the project, “the Beltline concept is much more than just a trail.”

- To date, Atlanta is behind schedule on streetscape improvements, building affordable housing and starting construction of the streetcar. According to the 2016 fiscal report, only 57 percent of the trail has been built, and only 9 percent of the anticipated budget spent. But here’s the thing: The Beltline, even in its scaled-down version, has been wildly successful. It has connected previously fragmented parks and mixed-use developments. On a recent night, I walked the one-mile portion that stretches through the bustling Old Fourth Ward.

- This part of the trail was flanked by mid-rise construction and packed with pedestrians. It’s arguably the most urban part of metro Atlanta. The Beltline has had similar impacts elsewhere, increasing home values in every area through which it passes. In its uncompleted status, the Beltline costs about $15 million per trail mile and yet has done as much as more expensive linear infrastructure projects have. The waterfront extensions in San Antonio and New Orleans, for example, which spurred similar development, cost $26 million and $67 million per mile, respectively. For comparison, light rail generally costs more than $100 million per mile.

- Walking trails may not accomplish all the things that linear infrastructure does. But if walkable and vibrant development is the main goal, they at least encourage that -- and for much cheaper. The Katy Trail in Dallas cost $5.7 million per mile, and the Indianapolis Cultural Trail cost $7.9 million, both generating growth in key areas. The Lynx light rail in Charlotte has attracted development, namely in an area where there also happens to be an adjacent concrete walking trail. It’s unclear which piece of infrastructure has better propelled growth, but Charlotte’s trail draws more than 2,000 users daily, while the portions of the rail line without this trail are less developed.

.....

[Omaharocks]

^ That photo is about 4 or 5 years old, and now both sides in that view are flanked by mixed use that matches the narrative.

The beltline is very successful for a number of reasons, but it is by no means a light touch - about 6 miles of trail have been built and the total spent is actually about $500 million, since it also includes new parks, Beltline-owned housing, and extensive programming. The total cost, as they mention, will ultimately be in the range of $5 billion.

I'm not sure that success can be easily replicated in other areas, but the point is valid that creating trail oriented development in an urban environment can lead to pretty wild changes, there just aren't very many instances of it being done well. The highline is another example, but it's also a very expensive piece of infrastructure.

[The North One]

So we should build trails instead of light rail systems, how insightful.

[llamaorama]

These comparisons are apples and oranges. IMO The success of these trails and parks has more to do with planners and developers looking at specific local needs combined with sheer luck. Same with modern streetcar lines.

Blindly saying ‘this is the new trend’ is cargo cult urbanism.

[cabasse]

Originally Posted by The North One

So we should build trails instead of light rail systems, how insightful.

funny you should say that. there's a lot of infighting right now with city residents and transit proponents over how to best spend newly allocated transit funding, with a sizable organized group beltline rail now! versus the city/marta and existing plans (the clifton corridor lrt/subway, between lindbergh station and emory/cdc and another line on the southside)

it's not either or in the case here, it's both - the beltline was always assumed to have LRT running adjacent to the path, and ROW was held for that purpose.

[M II A II R II K]

Light rail projects where its warranted can still go ahead, but other places that are not worthy of light rail can do this in those areas.